3 ms·

re: drone strikes, is it really any worse than the cruise missiles Clinton was fond of using? Clinton wasn't targeting Americans. If due process can be denied

by D9u 14y ago

re: drone strikes, is it really any worse than the cruise missiles Clinton was fond of using? Clinton wasn't targeting Americans. If due process can be denied to any American, then our "Moral High Ground" has been forfeit. Even child molesters, and foreign spies, are afforded a trial. Terrorists should also face a trial, as well as punishment when convicted. As for the right-center President, there is very little difference between the actions of Democrat and Republican presidents. It's like the difference between CocaCola and Pepsi when all we want is water.

jacquesm 14y ago
> If due process can be denied to any American, then our "Moral High Ground" has been forfeit. If due process can be denied to anybody, then our "Moral High Ground" has been forfeit.
- SEMW 14y ago
  Exactly right. A moral high ground built on an axiom of 'our citizens are now deserving of human rights than anyone else's' is more of a moral tar pit than a high ground.
  - Snoptic 14y ago
    If foreigners can't submit to our responsibilities, then they can't have our rights. The US doesn't rule the whole world, and the world doesn't want US to. Therefore, conflicts will arise, and there is no fair play among warring nations.
    - SEMW 14y ago
      > there is no fair play among warring nations. This might be a fair point if the US government was only claiming that the (supposedly inalienable) human rights which it respects in its own citizens are only suspended as against citizens of countries the US is in a state of war with. But it doesn't. It claims that they don't apply to any non-Americans (outside US borders, at least - non-US citizens inside US borders do have some protections, IIRC). And the US courts seem to agree (e.g. US v. Verdugo-Urquidez) The US is not at war with the entire rest of the world. > If foreigners can't submit to our responsibilities, then they can't have our rights. The original assertion was about what is moral. To make sure I understand you correctly - you're claiming that because I don't have responsibilities to the US government (I don't pay US taxes etc. being not a US citizen), it's not immoral for the US government to act in a way that, if I was a US citizen, would be an actionable breach of my fundamental rights?

by D9u 14y ago

jacquesm 14y ago

> If due process can be denied to any American, then our "Moral High Ground" has been forfeit. If due process can be denied to anybody, then our "Moral High Ground" has been forfeit.

SEMW 14y ago
Exactly right. A moral high ground built on an axiom of 'our citizens are now deserving of human rights than anyone else's' is more of a moral tar pit than a high ground.
- Snoptic 14y ago
  If foreigners can't submit to our responsibilities, then they can't have our rights. The US doesn't rule the whole world, and the world doesn't want US to. Therefore, conflicts will arise, and there is no fair play among warring nations.
  - SEMW 14y ago
    > there is no fair play among warring nations. This might be a fair point if the US government was only claiming that the (supposedly inalienable) human rights which it respects in its own citizens are only suspended as against citizens of countries the US is in a state of war with. But it doesn't. It claims that they don't apply to any non-Americans (outside US borders, at least - non-US citizens inside US borders do have some protections, IIRC). And the US courts seem to agree (e.g. US v. Verdugo-Urquidez) The US is not at war with the entire rest of the world. > If foreigners can't submit to our responsibilities, then they can't have our rights. The original assertion was about what is moral. To make sure I understand you correctly - you're claiming that because I don't have responsibilities to the US government (I don't pay US taxes etc. being not a US citizen), it's not immoral for the US government to act in a way that, if I was a US citizen, would be an actionable breach of my fundamental rights?